ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> JURIST - The Paper Chase

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal News

: JURIST - The Paper Chase

Hungary defends controversial media law in face of EU criticism

By Jaclyn Belczyk

ADVERTISEMENTS
Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Hungarian government on Tuesday continued to defend its controversial new media law in the face of criticism from the EU. The new law, which entered into force this week, creates the National Media and Communications Authority (NMHH) [official website, in Hungarian], which controls private television and radio broadcasters, newspapers and online news sites. Under the new law, the government can fine broadcasters more than 700,000 euros and newspapers and news websites roughly 90,000 euros if their coverage is deemed unbalanced or immoral by the media authority, whose members are all loyal to the ruling Fidesz party [party website, in Hungarian]. The new law has been harshly criticized [Daily Mail report] by members of the media, as well as other European governments, as too restrictive of free expression, and the European Commission has requested more information on the law to determine whether it complies with EU law. The Hungarian government, which assumed the EU presidency on January 1, has nevertheless continued to defend the law, with Zoltan Kovacs, state secretary for communication, telling national radio Tuesday that it is unnecessary to change the law [ANP/AFP report].

The Hungarian Parliament [official website, in Hungarian] approved the law [Reuters report] in December, amid protests and criticism. In 2008, the Constitutional Court of Hungary [official website] struck down [JURIST report] two proposals passed by the country's parliament to criminalize hate speech as unconstitutional infringements on the freedom of expression. The court held that the extremist speech that the amendments sought to prevent was not a danger to society because it was already marginalized. The first bill would have allowed recovery in cases where a person's ethnic group, rather than the individual person, was insulted. The second bill would have designated national, ethnic, racial or religious insults as misdemeanors punishable by up to two years in prison.

Full post as published by JURIST - The Paper Chase on January 04, 2011 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0021 secs (from cache 11/03/26 14:54:17)